trainshttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/8957/all
enRail Industry Fights Speed Limits, Brake Regulation in Quest for Profits http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/23/rail-industry-fights-speed-limits-brake-regulation-quest-profits
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/CP%20Locomotive.JPG?itok=lWNPwh9Z" width="200" height="181" alt="CP Rail train" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Earlier this month <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/new-rules-would-not-have-prevented-lac-megantic-disaster-says-cp-rail-head/article20901298/">Hunter Harrison, the <span class="caps">CEO</span> of Canadian Pacific </a>told the Globe and Mail that he thought regulators have “overreacted” to the oil-by-rail disaster in Lac-Megantic that killed 47 people. </p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Lac-Mégantic happened, in my view, because of one person’s behaviour, if I read the file right,” Harrison said.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/19/report-reveals-cost-cutting-measures-heart-lac-megantic-oil-train-disaster">As detailed by DeSmogBlog</a>, he didn’t read the file right. The accident was directly related to lack of regulation and the railroads putting profits before safety.</p>
<p>Harrison’s choice of words echoed those of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/02/oil-and-rail-industry-fight-oil-train-safety-measures-23-years">American Petroleum Institute <span class="caps">CEO</span> Jack Gerard</a> commenting on the new proposed oil-by-rail regulations when he stated: “Overreacting creates more challenges than safety.” </p>
<p>Yea, that’s right, according to Big Oil and Big Rail, the biggest threat to the 25 million people living in the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/09/05/safety-citizens-bomb-train-blast-zones-hands-north-dakota-politicians">bomb train blast zones</a> is the overreaction of regulators.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>The rail industry is now spending a lot of time pushing back on the new regulations on train speed. As anyone with a basic understanding of physics knows, the speed of the train is a critical factor in the severity of any accident.</p>
<p>Gregory Saxton, chief engineer for rail tank manufacturer <a href="http://www.gbrx.com/Tank_Cars.php">Greenbriar</a>, made that clear at a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/13/rail-ceos-investors-bomb-trains-safe-at-almost-any-speed">National Transportation Safety Board conference on oil-by-rail safety </a>in April.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Kinetic energy is related to the square of velocity. So if you double the speed, you have four times as much energy to deal with,” <a href="http://ntsb.capitolconnection.org/042214/ntsb042214.htm">argued Saxton</a>. “Speed is a big deal.”</p>
<p>Speed is also a big deal when it comes to profits. Canadian Pacific’s Harrison recently explained to the <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/canadarealtime/2014/10/02/interview-cp-railway-ceo-hunter-harrison-talks-about-his-efficiency-plans-and-more/">Wall Street Journal</a> that his main focus on improving profits was on increasing train speeds, “This next stage of growth is driven by a lot of things, a little bit here, a little bit there, but it’s effectively all the things that impact train speed and train velocity.”</p>
<p>And just as Harrison has arrived at his own incorrect conclusion about Lac-Megantic, he has once again ignored the facts when it comes to the relationship of speed to rail safety. DeSmogBlog reported <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/13/rail-ceos-investors-bomb-trains-safe-at-almost-any-speed">Harrison’s comments</a> earlier this year on a conference call talking to investors about rail safety.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>I don’t know of any incidents with crude that’s being caused by speed. We keep slowing down in this North American network over the years. We don’t get better with speed. We get worse.”</p>
<h3>
<strong>Putting the Brakes on Train Regulations</strong></h3>
<p>And the rail industry isn’t only arguing against speed limits in its pursuit of profit. It is also arguing against modernizing the braking systems for the oil trains. As previously reported on <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/06/18/white-house-meeting-logs-big-rail-lobbying-bomb-trains-regulations-touts-publicly">DeSmogBlog</a>, many of the oil trains being operated are using air brakes described as 19th century technology. </p>
<p>The rail industry is lobbying to avoid having to upgrade the braking systems to the latest technology known as <a href="https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/AAR-Calls-for-Regulations-to-Enhance-the-Safe-Transport-of-Flammable-Liquids-and-Keep-the-Rail-Network-Efficient.aspx#.VEUakEtt5BU">electronically controlled pneumatic brakes </a><a href="https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/AAR-Calls-for-Regulations-to-Enhance-the-Safe-Transport-of-Flammable-Liquids-and-Keep-the-Rail-Network-Efficient.aspx#.VEUakEtt5BU">(</a><span class="caps">ECP</span>) claiming that the benefits of this new braking don’t justify the costs. The American Association of Railroads (<span class="caps">AAR</span>) submitted comments to regulators urging them to, “Refrain from requiring electronically controlled pneumatic brakes on tank cars used to move flammable liquids, as they are very costly systems not justified in terms of improved safety benefits”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, a <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2012-0082-0210">report submitted by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration </a> as part of the documents for the new rulemaking process clearly defines the safety benefits of <span class="caps">ECP</span> braking compared to the existing and other proposed options. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The effectiveness rate of the <span class="caps">ECP</span> brake system (36 percent) was based on a model developed to predict the number of cars that will puncture when involved in a derailment. The effectiveness rate of the <span class="caps">DP</span> and <span class="caps">DP</span> (2/3) was estimated (18 percent) based on energy dissipation trend lines of trains equipped with these systems relative to the <span class="caps">ECP</span> brake system trend line.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So <span class="caps">ECP</span> braking systems are twice as effective as the next best option. Time will tell if regulators agree with rail lobbyists that this clear increase in safety is worth cutting into industry profits.</p>
<h3>
Rail Industry Asks for Applause (Seriously)</h3>
<p>In a press release last week, <a href="https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/AARs-Hamberger-Dont-Let-Regulation-Impede-Rail-Industrys-Role-in-Helping-Nations-Economy-Rebound.aspx#.VEUYzktt5B">American Association of Railroads president Edward Hamberger </a>expressed his concern about the regulators’ overreactions and explained how he thought the best approach for regulators is to step back and applaud the industry for all they do.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Instead of hampering the rail industry’s ability to grow the nation’s rail network and expand capacity due to the changes brought on by a growing economy, lawmakers and regulators should be applauding the industry’s can-do attitude and commitment. Tying the industry’s hand behind its back is not going to resolve the challenges shippers and rail alike are facing,” Hamberger said. </p>
<p>This week Canadian Pacific reported that its <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/cp-rail-profit-climbs-26-but-shy-of-expectations/article21187331/">third-quarter profits were up 26 percent</a>. <span class="caps">CP</span>’s stock price has now increased 50 percent in the last 12 months. The question now facing regulators is how many known safety measures will they sacrifice so that Canadian Pacific and the rest of the rail industry can continue going full speed ahead in their quest for ever greater profits — and applause.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14825">American Association of Railroads</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18210">Edward Hamberger</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12301">canadian pacific</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18495">CP</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14110">oil by rail</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17085">Crude by Rail</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17180">Big Rail</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1267">big oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18372">Hunter Harrison</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/621">globe and mail</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13118">Lac-Megantic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/643">American Petroleum Institute</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4499">API</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5152">Jack Gerard</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14840">Bomb Trains</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18496">blast zones</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17558">Rail Industry</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18497">Greebriar</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16911">Gregory Saxton</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9606">NTSB</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7247">national transportation safety board</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/wall-street-journal">wall street journal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8957">trains</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18498">electronically controlle pneumatic brakes</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18499">ECP</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16922">AAR</a></div></div></div>Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:00:00 +0000Justin Mikulka8681 at http://www.desmogblog.comA Record Year of Oil Train Accidents Leaves Insurers Waryhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2014/03/17/record-year-oil-train-accidents-leaves-insurers-wary
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_132864779.jpg?itok=pHDpNloN" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Spurred by the shale drilling rush that has progressed at breakneck speed, the railroad industry has moved fast to help drillers transport petroleum and its byproducts to consumers. Last year, trains hauled over 400,000 carloads of crude oil, up from just 9,500 carloads in 2008, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/us-regulators-order-crude-oil-tests-before-rail-shipment/article17096325/">according to</a> railroad industry estimates. Each carload represents roughly 30,000 gallons of flammable liquids, and some trains haul over 100 oil cars at a time.</p>
<p>But with this fast expansion has come some astounding risks — risks that have insurance companies and underwriters increasingly concerned.</p>
<p>A string of oil train explosions have highlighted the potential for harm. A train hauling 2.9 million gallons of Bakken oil derailed and exploded on November 8 in Aliceville, Alabama, and the oil that leaked but did not burn <a href="http://www.paradisepost.com/news/ci_25352091/months-after-oil-train-derailment-crude-still-found.">continues to foul</a> the wetlands in the area.<br /><br />
On December 30th, a train collision in Casselton, North Dakota 20 miles outside of Fargo, prompted a mass evacuation of over half the town’s residents after 18 cars exploded into fireballs visible for miles. 400,000 gallons of oil spilled after <a href="http://http://www.startribune.com/business/239948631.html http://www.startribune.com/local/238207831.html">that accident</a>, which involved two trains traveling well below local speed limits.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Those crashes are all on the radar of the insurance industry,” attorney Dean Hansell recently <a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/502246/insurers-will-take-lead-on-oil-rail-transport-safety-push">told Law360</a>.</p>
<p>All told, railcar accidents spilled more than 1.15 million gallons of crude oil <a href="http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/20/4764674/more-oil-spilled-from-trains-in.html">in 2013</a>, federal data shows, compared with an average of just 22,000 gallons a year from 1975 through 2012 — a fifty-fold spike.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Bakken oil train explosions have mostly been far from populated areas. But around <span class="caps">1AM</span> on July 5, 2013, over 60 oil cars exploded after a runaway train derailed in Lac-Megantic, a Canadian town near the Maine border, leveling dozens of buildings and <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/lac-megantic-faces/.">killing 47</a> of the town’s roughly 6,000 residents.</p>
<p>The railroad company, Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway, went belly up, leaving behind clean-up costs estimated at over $180 million. Canadian regulators discovered the company carried only <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-23686321 http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/lac-m%C3%A9gantic-rail-disaster-company-mm-a-files-for-bankruptcy-1.1338481">$25 million</a> in liability insurance. Legal battles over clean-up costs and lawsuits from survivors are expected to take at least <a href="http://globalnews.ca/news/756237/who-will-pay-for-cleanup-legal-battle-brewing-over-lac-megantic-spill/">a decade to resolve</a> — and for the time being, taxpayers are picking up the tab.</p>
<p>That tragic accident took place in a small town. An explosion in a major city could represent a far larger calamity. But neither oil and gas companies nor railroads carry enough insurance to cover the kind of catastrophe at risk when shipping crude by rail.</p>
<p>“There is not currently enough available coverage in the commercial insurance market anywhere in the world to cover the worst-case scenario,” James Beardsley, an executive with Marsh <span class="amp">&amp;</span> McLennan Cos.' Marsh Inc. insurance brokerage unit, <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304773104579268871635384130">told</a> the Wall Street Journal in January.</p>
<p><strong>Bakken Crude: A Hazard on the Rails</strong></p>
<p>It’s not just that more oil is moving by train, it’s also that Bakken shale oil seems to be particularly dangerous, according to federal regulators.</p>
<p>On January 2nd, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (<span class="caps">PHMSA</span>) issued a rare safety alert, saying “recent derailments and resulting fires indicate that the type of crude oil being transported from the Bakken region may be more flammable than traditional heavy crude oil.”<br /><br />
A few weeks later, the National Transportation Safety Board (<span class="caps">NTSB</span>) and its Canadian counterpart, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada warned that an oil train accident <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/01/23/215547/ntsb-pushes-regulators-to-improve.html">could result</a> in a “major loss of life” as they called for hazardous material shipping rules to apply to crude oil trains.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>The large-scale shipments of crude oil by rail simply didn’t exist 10 years ago, and our safety regulations need to catch up with this new reality,” <a href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ntsb-oil-train-crash-risks-major-loss-life">said</a> <span class="caps">NTSB</span> Chairman Deborah Hersman.</p>
<p>Railroad officials say that they’ve already taken voluntary steps to reduce the danger. Maximum speeds for trains with oil cars have been reduced, and where possible, trains are routed outside of major cities and highly populated corridors.</p>
<p>But some refineries handling Bakken crude are located directly inside major cities — like the major refinery in Philadelphia, where a train recently derailed over the Schuylkill river, just yards from a major highway underpass.</p>
<p>Every month, railcars carrying five million barrels of Bakken crude roll through the core of Philadelphia, heading to a refinery formerly owned by Sunoco and now run by a company called Philadelphia Energy Solutions, according to <a href="http://http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140310_Can_rail_infrastructure_get_back_on_track_.html#QP2YXvVJLR47SWVV.99">local press</a> reports.</p>
<p>Oil trains also pass through New York City, Chicago, the Pacific Northwest and the Gulf Coast.</p>
<p><strong>Insurers Nervous</strong></p>
<p>Over the past few years, many of the risks associated with fracking have drawn increased attention from insurers and insurance underwriters.</p>
<p>Increasingly, insurers are taking steps to insulate themselves against liability when fracking pollutes air and water or leads to accidents. A standard homeowner’s insurance policy won’t cover harm from fracking pollution, and insurance companies have <a href="http://www.insureme.com/home-insurance/fracking">so far declined</a> to offer special policies that would cover fracking risks. Nationwide Insurance, for example, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13/nationwide-insurance-fracking_n_1669775.html">announced</a> that its homeowners’ policies would not cover damage from fracking, saying the risks “are too great to ignore.”<br /><br />
When insurance runs out, companies can still be sued for the harm they do — but if they don’t have enough money to cover the claim, the people hurt may be out of luck.<br /><br />
“If the full net worth of the company (in addition to insurance coverage) is insufficient to cover the costs associated with an event, those costs will be borne by those who have suffered property damage or injuries,” the McMillian group, an actuarial consulting firmed wrote in a June 2012 <a href="http://us.milliman.com/insight/insurance/Fracking-Considerations-for-risk-management-and-financing/">note</a>, explaining that drillers’ use of shell corporations to shield assets made that “a very real possibility.”</p>
<p><strong>Ruinous Liability</strong></p>
<p>Railroads may find themselves in a similar bind.</p>
<p>Only few dozen insurance companies offer liability insurance to railroads, and coverage is often limited to less than $50 million per policy, meaning that the highest level of coverage available, if a company maxes out available policies, is <a href="http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/acg-acgb-review-liability-rail-3106.html">$1.5 billion</a>. Major railroads commonly “self-insure” against accidents over a certain threshold, meaning that a big enough accident could wipe out all of a company’s assets.</p>
<p>So without enough insurance, hauling that crude represents a major gamble.<br /><br />
“A railroad moving hazardous shipments faces exposure to potentially ruinous liability,” the Association of American Railroads <a href="http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUKL5N0L12EJ20140127?feedType=RSS&amp;feedName=rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews">told</a> the Canadian Transportation Agency. “While incidents involving highly hazardous materials on railroads are exceedingly rare, railroads could be subjected to multi-billion dollar claims solely because of the unusual characteristics of the commodities themselves.”</p>
<p>Adequately protecting against oil train explosions would be expensive, raising the costs of delivering oil to consumers. But if shippers and railroads do not carry insurance, an explosion could bankrupt the companies involved, leaving the people rebuilding in the lurch.</p>
<p>As the Obama administration considered the Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span>’s pipeline application, it decided it was unnecessary to take all of the impacts of tar sands extraction into account, reasoning that the oil would find other ways to market. The bitumen, they said, would be shipped by train if it was not pumped through pipelines, so construction would have little impact on how quickly or pervasively tar sands oil was extracted.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Cross-border pipeline constraints have a limited impact on crude flows and prices,” the State Department report <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/03/06/experts-rail-a-feasible-alternative-for-keystone-xl">said</a>. “If new east-west and cross-border pipelines were both completely constrained, oil sands crude could reach <span class="caps">U.S.</span> and Canadian refineries by rail.”</p>
<p>But the growing concerns from the insurance industry undermine that assumption. Shipping by rail already costs between $2 and $22 per barrel <a href="http://theenergycollective.com/jessejenkins/232591/climate-change-impacts-keystone-XL">more</a> than shipping by pipeline, and <a href="http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/buffett-says-rail-tank-cars-need-upgrades-for-oil/article_5add63c2-a2e7-11e3-9e08-001a4bcf887a.html">upgrading rail cars</a>, <a href="http://lancasteronline.com/donegal/news/concerns-over-recent-oil-train-accidents-prompt-training-session-for/article_066604ee-a872-11e3-8210-0017a43b2370.html">training</a> <a href="http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/03/04/oil-trains-safety">first responders</a> in case of a catastrophe, and <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=282872579">rebuilding aging rail lines</a> will all add enormous additional expenses.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-13/oil-train-explosions-u-dot-s-dot-regulators-slow-to-react">A plan</a> endorsed by the mayors of several major <span class="caps">U.S.</span> cities, including Philadelphia and Chicago, calls for fees on train shipments to cover these costs.</p>
<p>The issue “starts to revolve around the dollar sign,” Canadian Pacific Railway <span class="caps">CEO</span> E. Hunter Harrison <a href="http://http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304773104579268871635384130">told</a> the Wall Street Journal. “Can we do this safer? Yes. But who's going to pay? If you decide this commodity must be moved in the public interest, then I think all of us have to pay.”</p>
<p>The question is, are those costs worth paying, especially when renewable energy sources <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/sunday-review/life-after-oil-and-gas.html?_r=0">grow more viable</a> every year?</p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Photo Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-132864779/stock-photo-train-accident.html?src=Oy6EfxNb04-b4S2juQph9A-1-24">Train Accident</a>, via Shutterstock.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15560">Bakken oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7277">shale oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8957">trains</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15561">rail roads</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8240">Railroads</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/insurance">insurance</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14573">liability</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8827">explosions</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11834">spills</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15562">Aliceville</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14812">casselton</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13118">Lac-Megantic</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15563">Montreal Main and Atlantic Railway</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5790">lawsuits</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15564">survivors</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14070">taxpayers</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15565">large city</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15566">Philadelphia</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2714">Chicago</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/911">new york</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10938">Seattle</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7247">national transportation safety board</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9606">NTSB</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15567">Transportation Safety Board of Canada</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15568">major loss of life</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7582">refineries</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15569">Bakken crude</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5612">crude oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5538">bitumen</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15570">Natiowide Insurance</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15571">homeowners insurance</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15572">bankrupt</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2520">Association of American Railroads</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone XL</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4754">President Obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15573">State Department report</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11450">costs</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12736">Expenses</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15574">first responder training</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15575">railroad infrastructure</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15576">detrailments</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15577">derail</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15578">explode</a></div></div></div>Tue, 18 Mar 2014 13:00:00 +0000Sharon Kelly7930 at http://www.desmogblog.comOil Aboard! Tar Sands Industry Eyes Nexen Rail Alternative to Stalled Pipelines http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/15/oil-aboard-tar-sands-nexen-rail-stalled-pipelines
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/nexen_0_0.jpeg?itok=W--zMoiK" width="200" height="79" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Facing enormous opposition to the proposed Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> and Northern Gateway pipelines, Canada’s tar sands industry is taking to the tracks to get its sticky bitumen to China. Canadian and Chinese oil companies have explored the “pipeline by rail” option for years now, but over the past month, the prospect of tar sands trains has taken a few big steps closer toward reality.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">For over a year, Calgary-based <a href="http://www.nexeninc.com/">Nexen, Inc</a>. has been <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/nexen-closer-to-moving-crude-oil-to-west-coast-by-train/article7981477/">developing plans to load tar sands crude onto trains for transport to the West Coast</a>, where it would be loaded onto barges and shipped to China. Late last month, the Canadian government approved the sale of Nexen to a nationalized Chinese oil company, and earlier this week, the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> government, which has some say because of Nexen’s major operations in the Gulf of Mexico, <a href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/nexen-secures-u-s-approval-of-its-sale-to-cnooc-of-china/?ref=energy-environment">gave its stamp of approval</a>. According to Nexen, the company now has “all the requisite approvals” and the deal “is expected to close the week of February 25, 2013.” (So much for Canadian tar sands benefiting Canadians first and foremost.)</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Rail is considered more and more appealing to industry insiders as numerous plans to ship tar sands crude by pipeline have grown increasingly controversial and have been stalled by climate and private property activists from British Columbia to New England to Nebraska. (See: the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span></a>, the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5534">Northern Gateway</a>, and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/9463">Trailbreaker/Enbridge Line 9</a>.)</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">In fact, the industry is growing desperate to find ways to export the heavy Canadian crude, as export pipeline capacity is currently maxed out, causing a glut in supply in Alberta, which is driving down prices and causing, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/nexen-closer-to-moving-crude-oil-to-west-coast-by-train/article7981477/">according to the <em>Globe and Mail</em></a>, “billions in forfeited revenues.”</span></p>
<!--break-->
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Nexen – now under the control of the the <a href="http://www.cnoocltd.com/">China National Offshore Oil Corporation</a>, or <span class="caps">CNOOC</span> – hopes to deliver tar sands crude via train to <a href="http://www.rupertport.com/">Prince Rupert, British Columbia</a>, where an export terminal would be built on federal lands to offload the oil onto China-bound tankers. The <em>Globe and Mail</em> explains the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/nexen-closer-to-moving-crude-oil-to-west-coast-by-train/article7981477/">startlingly simple regulatory path to rail-facilitated exports</a>:</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Prince Rupert possesses North America’s deepest natural harbour and the shortest distance to many Asian ports from any port outside Alaska. The use of already-built track could also skirt some of the regulatory conflict provoked by Northern Gateway, the planned Enbridge Inc. pipeline to the <span class="caps">B.C.</span> coast. Though environmental scrutiny would be applied to the construction of tanks and a terminal, oil can move freely today on train tank cars.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">So the tracks exist already, the harbor is seen as ready to go, and the only real hurdle for the industry will be the construction of storage tanks and the physical export terminal itself.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">For reference, on this map, you can find Prince Rupert at the western terminus of the northernmost rail line in British Columbia. (The <span class="caps">CN</span>/<span class="caps">GTR</span> line, or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_National_Railway">Canadian National/Grand Trunk Railway line</a>.) </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Class1rr_0.png" style="width: 476px; height: 480px;" /></span></p>
<p>This isn’t the first time we’ve discussed oil trains here on DeSmogBlog. A few months back, I explored the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/02/oil-tracks-how-rail-quietly-picking-pipeline-s-slack">growing trend of “pipeline by rail” here in the United States</a>. While that piece was mostly about oil from the Bakken Shale finding its way via rail to coastal refineries, it also noted that there is already a fair amount of tar sands crude crossing the Canadian-<span class="caps">U.S.</span> border, bound for the Gulf and East Coasts.</p>
<p>I also broke down how much easier it is to gain regulatory approval for trains. Not that this mode of transport is free of risk, as this <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/with-pipelines-under-attack-railways-lead-race-to-move-oil/article7264773/"><em>Globe and Mail</em> article from January explains</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Though accidents remain infrequent, trains leak hazardous materials more frequently than pipelines, have a higher accidental death rate and produce greater emissions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">But wait, there’s more:</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">But underlying the euphoria is a set of unpleasant statistics. Trains may deliver big new profits to oil companies and refineries alike. They also deliver the potential for problems. The industry itself acknowledges that trains have nearly three times the number of spills as pipelines. The <span class="caps">U.S.</span> State Department found that, when moving liquids, trains have a death rate three times higher than pipelines and a fire or explosion rate nine times higher.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>This isn't to say that oil trains are more important to fight than pipelines. Nor that the current battles over Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> and Enbridge's Line 9 and the Northern Gateway should be forsaken.<br /><br />
But it is, as I wrote a few months back, “<span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">a reminder that, above all else, demand is what drives the oil boom,” and that as long as there is strong demand, oil is always going to keep finding a way to refineries, and the plundering of the tar sands will continue to expand dangerously for the global climate.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10186">Nexen</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8957">trains</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10379">oil trains</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8242">Rail</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12092">pipeline by rail</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10187">CNOOC</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12093">China National Offshore Oil Corporation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1165">Alberta</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9056">Prince Rupert</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7372">export</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12094">tar sands exports</a></div></div></div>Sat, 16 Feb 2013 18:00:00 +0000Ben Jervey6892 at http://www.desmogblog.comCoal Train to Boardman: EPA Warns of "Significant" Public Health Threats in Northwest Coal Export Proposalhttp://www.desmogblog.com/coal-train-boardman-epa-warns-significant-public-health-threats-northwest-coal-export-proposal
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/110326007Paul_K_Anderson_Coal-copy1.jpg?itok=E1OFnZ8C" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>As demand for coal in the United States has cooled off in recent years, coal mining companies have been scrambling to deliver their dirty loads to customers abroad. But what does this mean for communities along the transportation routes, particularly at the ports and export terminals where the coal is offloaded from trains and onto boats?<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">U.S.</span> <span class="caps">EPA</span>, for one, is warning of the potential for “significant impacts to public health” in one such port town.</p>
<p>Coal exports have more than doubled over the past six years, and are at their highest levels in over two decades. According to an <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gEPo52y3iAhPhyDU_Ir5N3pz6QZA?docId=b1e41839ca5f47e5a39e44aec019c633">Associated Press evaluation of Energy Information Agency coal data</a>, more than 107 million tons of coal were exported in 2011.<br /><br />
But that’s a small drop in the bucket (or lump in the stocking? sorry, couldn’t resist) of what coal companies hope to export in the very near future. (Farron Cousins covered the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/exporting-emissions-coal-supplies-heading-overseas-pollution-will-hurt-everyone">coal export trend here on DeSmogBlog </a>earlier this year.)</p>
<p>Nowhere is the push to export coal being felt more than in the Pacific Northwest, where there are currently plans to ship more than 100 million tons each year, <a href="http://daily.sightline.org/projects/northwest-coal-exports/">according to the Sightline Institute</a>.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Of course, all of this coal would have to actually get from land to sea, and so companies are working to open up export terminals throughout the Pacific Northwest. One such proposal is for the town of Boardman, Oregon, in a facility formerly called the <a href="http://www.portofmorrow.com/">Port of Morrow</a>. (I’m working on a more comprehensive post about the overall state of coal exports, coal trains, and the potential export terminals throughout the country, especially in the Northwest, so stay tuned for that.)</p>
<p>The company behind the Boardman terminal plans is <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coyote_Island_Terminal_LLC">Coyote Island Terminal <span class="caps">LLC</span></a>, a subsidiary of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ambre_Energy">Ambre Energy</a>, and Australian coal and oil shale company that is one of the major players in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> coal export game. In order to open up the Boardman port, Ambre needs approval of the Army Corps of Engineers, which is currently reviewing the application. Here’s how the project is described in the Army Corps’ Public Notice (<a href="http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/docs/notices/NWP-2012-56-ext.pdf"><span class="caps">PDF</span></a>)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The proposed project involves construction of a new transloading facility for bringing coal in from Montana and Wyoming by rail and transferring it to barges on the Columbia River at the Port of Morrow…</p>
<p>The coal would be shipped down the Columbia to Port Westward and loaded onto ocean-going “Panamax” vessels to be shipped to Asia. Best management practices would be used throughout the transportation of the coal to contain coal dust, including enclosed warehouses, barges, conveyors, and loading equipment. Initially, approximately 3.85 million tons of coal would be shipped through the facility to Asia each year. At maximum capacity, the facility would be able to handle 8.8 million tons. That would translate to approximately 5 trains to Port of Morrow, 5.5 loaded barge tows from Port of Morrow to Port Westward, and 1 Panamax ship to Asia per week initially, increasing to 11 trains, 12 loaded barge tows, and 3 Panamax ships per week at full build out. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, in short: in Boardman, coal would be offloaded from trains onto barges in the Columbia River, where it would float down to Port Westward, Oregon (roughly 30 miles north of Portland), where it would be loaded onto big ocean vessels for shipment to Asia.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20shot%202012-04-25%20at%204.25.45%20PM.png" style="width: 560px; height: 403px; " /></p>
<p>Some residents of Boardman, with a population of about 3,000, seem welcome to the proposal. A New York Times article from a couple of weeks back quotes a worker from a hay fumigation warehouse that would be just a few hundred feet from the coal facility, saying, “I don't think there will be any environmental impact anyway.”</p>
<p>The <span class="caps">EPA</span> isn't so sure of that. </p>
<p>On April 5, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> submitted public comments (<a href="http://media.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/other/EPA%20letter%20about%20PEIS.PDF"><span class="caps">PDF</span></a>) about the Boardman proposal under the National Environmental Protection Act and the Clean Air Act, and some red flags were raised.<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">EPA</span> raised concerns about a number of issues, including impacts on listed species, critical habitats, and aquatic resources, as well as the project’s potential contributions to “cumulatively significant impacts” like climate change and the drift of particulates, mercury, and ozone from Asia to the United States.<br /><br />
But most alarming are the agency’s concerns about public health. From their comments:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Transporting and transloading up to 8.8 million tons of coal with eleven trains, twelve loaded barge tows, and two Panamax ships per week has the <strong>potential to significantly impact human health and the environment</strong>. Two of our primary preliminary concerns relate to the potential for adverse effects from project-related coal dust and diesel pollution. <strong>Coal dust is a human health concern because it can cause pneumoconiosis, bronchitis, and emphysema</strong>. Coal dust is an environmental concern because it may settle on water, soil, or vegetation and impair biological processes such as photosynthesis. <strong>In addition, coal dust has been shown to cause tumors in experimental animals</strong>. We are similarly concerned about diesel emissions because they can cause lung damage, aggravate existing respiratory disease such as asthma and are thought to be a human carcinogen. <strong>Diesel emissions have a high potential to impact people who are sensitive to the health effects of fine particles (e.g. children, the elderly, and those with existing heart of lung disease, asthma or other respiratory problems)</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s role in the Corps’ permitting process, however, is only advisory, so the Corps can choose to accept or reject the agency’s recommendation.</p>
<p>If you would like to submit a public comment about the proposed project, send an email or letter to this address:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><span class="caps">U.S.</span> Army Corps of Engineers<br />
Mr. Steve Gagnon; <a href="mailto:steven.k.gagnon@usace.army.mil">steven.k.gagnon@usace.army.mil</a><br /><span class="caps">PO</span> Box 2946<br />
Portland, <span class="caps">OR</span> 97208-2946</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You must reference this Corps number: <strong><span class="caps">NWP</span>-2012-56</strong></p>
<p>The public comment period ends May 5, 2012.</p>
<p>More details are available in the Army Corps’ Public Notice (<a href="http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/docs/notices/NWP-2012-56-ext.pdf"><span class="caps">PDF</span></a>).</p>
<p><br /><em>Photo: Paul K. Anderson, via <a href="http://www.coaltrainfacts.org/multimedia">CoalTrainFacts.org</a></em></p>
<p><em>Map: <span class="caps">US</span> Army Corps of Engineers (<a href="http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/docs/notices/NWP-2012-56-ext.pdf"><span class="caps">PDF</span></a>)</em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/662">coal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/761">china</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/958">Oregon</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1471">Environmental Protection Agency</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4175">health</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6444">public health</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7372">export</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7769">army corp of engineers</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8242">Rail</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8956">coal train</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8957">trains</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8958">coal exports</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8959">Boardman</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8960">Columbia River</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8961">ambre energy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8962">ambre</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8963">coyote island terminal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8964">northwest</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8965">pacific northwest</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8966">army corps</a></div></div></div>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:45:00 +0000Ben Jervey6226 at http://www.desmogblog.com